An archive of the key court rulings in the Tristangate dispute.
U.S. Appellate Court Confirms the Award
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit confirms the previous court ruling from March 23, 2018 that the award is valid and enforceable as a binding U.S. judgment. The ruling states that: “We find that it was not an abuse of discretion for the District Court to deny Kazakhstan’s motion because the District Court based its ruling on multiple valid grounds. We further agree with the District Court that Kazakhstan improperly presented new facts in its motion for reconsideration that it had not introduced in its original motion to supplement.”
As a result of this ruling, any non-state immune Kazakh state assets on U.S. soil become amenable to attachment and foreclosure by the Stati Parties.
Search Our Library
The Supreme Court of the State of New York granted a motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Republic of Kazakhstan against Daniel Chapman and New York-based investment firm Argentem Creek Partners.
Since December 2013, Kazakhstan has refused to pay and instead adopted a multijurisdictional legal strategy designed to frustrate the Award and avoid compliance with its binding international treaty obligations.
As part of these efforts, in June 2020 Kazakhstan filed a lawsuit in the United States against Daniel Chapman and Argentem Creek Partners, alleging that Argentem Creek Partners’ financing of attempts to enforce the Award constituted fraud. On August 29 2022, Judge Andrew Borrok of the Supreme Court State of New York granted a motion to dismiss this lawsuit.
The Hague Court of Appeal cancelled the attachment of shares worth around $5.2 billion held by Kazakhstan’s sovereign wealth fund JSC Samruk-Kazyna in KMG Kashagan BV. The Hague Court of Appeal reversed its previous finding that the shares were not immune from attachment on the basis that they did not have an immediate public purpose.
Lawyers for Argentem Creek Partners and its CEO Daniel Chapman filed a motion to dismiss the claims brought by Kazakhstan in its Third Amended Complaint in the Supreme Court of New York. The motion argues that New York law provides the Court with multiple, independent grounds to dismiss Kazakhstan’s frivolous lawsuit with prejudice.
A federal judge in New York on February 10 granted the Argentem parties motion to compel arbitration against plaintiff Outrider thereby dismissing them from Kazakhstan’s vexatious litigation against U.S. investors. The Court also granted the motion by Kazakhstan to remand the case to New York State Court where Argentem’s motion to dismiss Kazakhstan’s claims will be decided.